Take sides on the hot topics of the day

IPL 2013

April 2, 2013

Is the IPL a two-tier tournament between non-equals?


Chennai, Mumbai, Kolkata, Delhi and Bangalore have the financial muscle to ensure they have the best players. The other teams, including Pune who entered the IPL late, don't stand a chance against their might.


Rajasthan, Punjab and Hyderabad and Pune might not have the attendant glitz and hype that surrounds the big five, but they compete as equals on the field. The fact that Rajasthan and Hyderabad won the first two editions proves that the underdogs can succeed in the IPL.


© ESPN Sports Media Ltd.

. Your ESPN name '' will be used to display your comments. Please click here to edit this.
Comments have now been closed for this article

April 8, 2013, 12:14 GMT


Yes, IPL is two-tier. It is quite evident that few teams excel because of their top buys compared to the other teams who can not or are reluctant to invest more. Although it leaves a sweet impression when the lower tier teams(ex. mohali, pune) beat the upper tier teams, it makes up for a mismatch of contest. What are the likes that a team like Pune can beat Bangalore/Chennai twice??? Almost none. The problem magnifies when you count the interest of viewers on such games. I do not say that IPL is all entertainment, but, entertainment is certainly the biggest part of it. Viewers obviously tend to go away from the matches which they believe can not entertain them enough, which beats the whole purpose of it.

April 6, 2013, 6:32 GMT


Teams like Rajasthan,Punjab and Hyderabad are clear examples of teams being short of financial muscle. Even though these teams also have talented players in their respective squads,at the end of the day,these teams always seem to be missing impact players who could turn the games single handedly. On the contrary,teams like Chennai, Mumbai and Bangalore,courtesy of their bank balance have managed to acquire such players. The minnows may succeed in the short run due to the nature of T20 cricket,but in the long run, its the teams with financial power who have succeeded. The results of the last 3 IPL editions also confer this.

April 19, 2013, 17:10 GMT


no its not a two tier match between unequals! sometimes one team win next time the other wins! its not that they are unequals! one team cannot be dominant over other the other everytime

April 12, 2013, 13:35 GMT


yesssssssssssssssss because of the retaining policy. the contract of players should be for one season and after that fresh auction should be done of all the players. no retaining business man. its not two-tier, its third class.

April 12, 2013, 11:46 GMT


Yes, I agree its a Two Tier Tournament with clearly Mumbai, Chennai, Bangalore, Delhi & Kolkata in the top rung and Punjab, Rajasthan, Hyderabad & Pune in the second rung. However the format is such that it requires one or two exceptional performance on a day to turn the tide and as a results the winners are often underdogs.

One performance from Paul Valthaty for Kings XI or a solid team contribution from Rajasthan are such examples, which typies the beauty of the format.

April 8, 2013, 13:41 GMT


Each edition has thrown up some champions and some also rans. That does not mean that these teams are un-equals. If DC had finished last in the first edition they Won it in South Africa and again dropped down in the following editions. Only CSK and RCB have been consistant so far. It is not like the World Cup where you know that atleast 4 teams are very weak and can only upset the others but cannot beat them in normal course. With players being traded every year, the scope for imporvement is there every passing year. See how SRH have improved this year. Punjab has started off well this year after being so low in the past 2 editions. I think it will take a couple of years more to say which are real strong teams and which are not. Only CSK have won twice but they have done so after being pushed to a corner and had to win do-or-die games to reach the semis. So, dont jump to conclusions so early. Let the teams perform and may the best team on the day win.

April 7, 2013, 15:16 GMT


I think the team that has better Indian players has the edge. Of course players like Gayle, Pollard can win you games on their own, but I don't think its 2 tier competition. Sunrisers have Steyn, Sanga, White but apart from Dhawan they don't have quality indian batsmen. Teams like Mumbai have Rohit, Rayudu, Karthik in middle order. You need to have performing Indian players to support the big names. Any one can beat any tame in a T20 match. But over a period of 14 matches, the consistent team will win.

April 7, 2013, 13:45 GMT


Have certain teams consistently outperformed others - possibly. However by no means is there a clear delineation of a two-tier tournament. Remember the first two editions were won by the Rajasthan Royals and the Deccan Chargers - hence they have performed well too. Kings XI has almost always had their season come down to the last league game and KKR only became of significant relevance last season.

The "Big 5" are essentially metro cities with large financial backing due to larger guaranteed revenues, however astute buying and strong young Indian talent will likely see one of RR, Hyderabad, Punjab emerge very strongly this year.

April 13, 2013, 6:57 GMT


T20 is always going to be a game where not only does the underdog have a chance, she or he has a kind of moral ascendancy. You only have to look at the number of Indian players of Punjabi origin (and indeed, some in England and now Australia) to know Punjab and Rajasthan are always going to be able to find some depth and aggravation. Plus, there's a few dozen players in Australia, RSA, England and Pakistan who could raise the standard of the IPL if let in. I think the only sensible barometer is to compare the IPL to any football league in Europe - how much more even than those is it? And, thankfully, the IPL doesn't last long, so people can take the money and get back to playing proper cricket.

April 13, 2013, 5:50 GMT


Each IPL edition has thrown up new stars from different teams displaying their abilities to power their teams to victory. It rarely matters what your name is, what matters is your performance. In the first edition, it was the supposedly minnows in the IPL RR that won the tournament without too any stars in the line up. Second edition too was similar in the way that the teams in the finals were at the bottom of the league last year. DC was no way owned by a super rich and powerful owner. On the other hand MI, RCB and DD have not won it yet and KKR did it just recently. CSK is probably the exception but it too has won because its stars performed. Again, its not an ideal world where a name guarantees a good game!